Cases 1 - 6 of 6
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. APPROXIMATELY $1,362,727.64 FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT IN BUCKEYE STATE BANCSHARES, INC. ACCOUNT NO. 312026 HELD IN THE NAME OF JJF CONSTRUCTION LLC et al
as 2:2023cv22312
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
APPROXIMATELY $1,362,727.64 FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT IN BUCKEYE STATE BANCSHARES, INC. ACCOUNT NO. 312026 HELD IN THE NAME OF JJF CONSTRUCTION LLC and APPROXIMATELY $1,642,755.55 FORMERLY ON DEPOSIT IN F&M BANK AND TRUST COMPANY ACCOUNT NOS. 5106230, 200025521, AND 1005278 HELD IN THE NAME OF KENT D. WARNING DBA PAYOFF ACCOUNT SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 21 U.S.C. § 841 Forfeiture Property-Drugs
DURAN v. DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE
as 1:2021cv02398
Plaintiff:
JASON DURAN
Defendant:
DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Kim v. Defense Finance Accounting Services
as 8:2013cv00234
Plaintiff:
Tae Hoon Kim
Defendant:
Defense Finance Accounting Services
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3731 Fraud
United States of America v. Lavien, et al.
as 0:2010cv02011
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Joseph V. Lavien , Jacqueline Lavien , Palm Healthcare Services, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Account Services Corporation v. USA
as 09-56420
Respondent - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Movant - Appellant:
ACCOUNT SERVICES CORPORATION
Movant:
IN THE MATTER OF THE SEIZURE OF ALL FUNDS ON DEPOSIT AT UNION BANK, N.A., IN SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, in accounts 353000248 and 353000256, and all funds on deposit at Wells Fargo Bank, in Escondido, California, in account number 7986104185, held in the name
v. United States of America
as 3:2009cv01495
Movant:
In the matter of the seizure of all funds on Deposit at Union Bank, N.A., In San Diego, California and Account Services Corporation
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
